Cases 1 - 10 of 30
Gonzalez v. Gillis
as 21-60764
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Louis Gonzalez, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, also known as Carlos Ramos Sanchez
Defendant / Appellee:
Warden Shawn R. Gillis, Unit Manager Joseph January, In his individual and official capacity, Unit Counselor Cynthia Pernell, In her individual and official capacities and others
Gonzalez v. Gillis
as 21-60634
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Louis Gonzalez, also known as Carlos Ramos Sanchez
Defendant / Appellee:
Shawn R. Gillis, Stanley Crockett, Chad Wolf and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv01794
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Gillis v. Department of the Army
as 3:2021cv00481
Plaintiff:
Marzett Gillis
Defendant:
Department of the Army
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Colina v. Gillis
as 21-60064
Petitioner / Appellant:
Jaime Ramon Alvarez Colina
Respondent / Appellee:
Shawn R. Gillis, Warden of Adams County Correctional Center
Shantrice Jones v. Southern University, et al
as 20-30231
Defendant / Appellee:
ELAINE LEWNAU, TERRILYNN GILLIS, SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SHANTRICE L. JONES
Francisco Serrano v. USA, et al
as 19-60249
Respondent / Appellee:
SHAWN R. GILLIS and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Petitioner / Appellant:
FRANCISCO ANTONIO SERRANO
Gillis v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc. et al
as 4:2018cv00108
Plaintiff:
James Gillis
Defendant:
UnitedHealth Group, Inc., United HealthCare Services, Inc. and United Behavioral Health, operating as OptumHealth Behavioral Solutions
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Aequitas Management, LLC et al
as 1:2016mc00423
Plaintiff:
Securities and Exchange Commission
Defendant:
Aequitas Management, LLC, Aequitas Holding, LLC, Aequitas Commercial Finance, LLC and others
Movant:
Ronald Greenspan
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
